Freedom of Information Act request

[Flemingovia]

Mr Delegate,

I understand that my recent application to join the NPAF was the subject of an IRC discussion between yourself and Minister of Defence Eluvatar (and possibly other parties unknown), whch led to the rejection of that application. Under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, I request the release to me of the unredacted log of that discussion. I note that defence is part of the executive, and this discussion was in your executive capacity, so it is covered by the FOIA act.

For reference, the FOI Act states:

18. All registered residents residing in The North Pacific may request information from the Government through the Delegate and the designated officers of the Executive.
19. The Delegate and the designated officers of the Executive will endeavour to retrieve information requested from the different departments of the government, who are obligated to release this information provided it will not and/or does not present a threat to regional security or unduly impinge on the privacy of private residents

 

[Tomb]

Hello Flemingovia,

Your request is hereby accepted. I do not know how to restore an old IRC log, so I will have to ask Eluvatar to give it to me or teach me how to restore it.

But anyways, I wanted to let you know that your request is accepted, and I will post the logs or have Elu post them ASAP.

~ Tomb

 

[Eluvatar]

My IRC logs are temporarily unavailable, but the computer they are stored on should be back up within a few hours, I hope. If not, they are probably backed up on another computer which I will bring up if I fail to bring up the former.

 

[Gracius Maximus]

Is there an update available on this request?

I am awaiting the full log as a matter of prudence in regards to the current Criminal Complaint before the Attorney General's Office.

 

[Funkadelia]

I don't want to necessarily speak for Eluvatar but last I heard he was still having computer troubles.

 

[Eluvatar]

[16:55:31] <Tomb> Hi Eluvatar
[16:56:03] <Tomb> Eluvatar, I wanted to get in touch with you regarding a recent NPA application, that of Flemingovia's.
[16:56:36] <Tomb> http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/single/?p=8216864&t=7279690
[16:56:48] <Tomb> ^ Is the application.
[17:01:00] <Tomb> I wanted to discuss with you whether it'd be wise to admit Flemingovia or not. Flemingovia has insulted the NPA on many multiple occasions, actually, every time they have a chance to do so.
[17:04:28] <Tomb> Also the timing of Flemingovia's NPA application is concerning me. Right when we're about to pass an amendment that'd require someone to report operations, he applies to join.
[17:17:49] <Eluvatar> He's quite transparent about that
[17:21:00] <Tomb> I don't get why a person as opposed to the NPA and its operations as Flemingovia would request to join it. I mean, if we want to admit Flemingovia, we should at least get in touch with him about his criticism of the organization.
[17:21:27] <Eluvatar> I would be perfectly happy to have a chat with flemingovia
[17:21:35] <Eluvatar> he's stated he'd be interested in defensive operations
[17:21:52] <Eluvatar> perhaps he liked working with the broader Lazarene liberation effort
[17:23:12] <Eluvatar> I'm not sure I fully understand the concerns
[17:23:23] <Tomb> I'm glad that he has an interest in it. And I'd appreciate it you talk to him. That'd be great.
[17:23:41] <Eluvatar> I suppose it's the subtleties of distinctions between TNP as a whole and NPA
[17:24:41] <Tomb> <Eluvatar>: I'm not sure I fully understand the concerns ---> My concerns of admitting Flem, or my concerns regarding the on-going amendment in discussion?
[17:25:06] <Eluvatar> the former
[17:30:59] <Tomb> Eluvatar, does it make sense for an army general or officer to criticize his own army and call some of their operations "panty raids" in front of the whole region? As he gets up the ranks of the NPA, I don't think it'd be to the best of our army's interest to have someone like that if his behavior continues.
[17:31:18] <Tomb> He’d drive away potential recruits, to begin with. Now, I certainly, don’t mind hearing his complaints. I’m always opened to criticism as long as its constructive, but Flem’s behavior towards the NPA has been far from constructive.
[17:31:38] <Tomb> As of late at least.
[17:31:46] <Eluvatar> I didn't find it offensive :/
[17:31:50] <Eluvatar> But maybe I have a different perspective
[17:40:28] <Tomb> Maybe. Of course, I have the highest respect for Flem, and I really appreciate the contributions they've give to the region. I'd love for Flem to join the NPA and participate, but I also want to make sure that he's going to be acting in the best interest of the NPA once in.
[17:49:47] <Eluvatar> I see it differently
[17:50:07] * Tomb nods.
[17:50:18] <Eluvatar> to me, the only valid reason to deny someone membership in the NPA is if their membership would directly harm it
[17:50:37] <Tomb> Oh, no, I'm not saying deny the application.
[17:50:39] <Eluvatar> well, that's kind of vague
[17:50:42] <Eluvatar> what do I mean by "directly"
[17:52:21] <Tomb> I just simply want Flem to promise to respect the organization and act in the best of its interest up on joining. It's not too much to ask for, really.
[17:52:35] <Eluvatar> What do you mean by respect?
[17:52:55] <Eluvatar> like this could be misinterpreted really badly
[17:57:10] <Tomb> I don't see how. But I'll explain what I mean. By respect, I mean that I don't want him going on constantly criticizing every operation that the NPA participates in that he doesn't like. If he wants to criticize the army at any point, he's free to do it so in a constructive manner. "This is what I didn't like, this why, and this why I recommend doing in the
[17:57:14] <Tomb> future."
[17:57:30] <Eluvatar> Yeah that's even more misinterpretable
[17:58:07] <Eluvatar> how are we going to distinguish constructive from unconstructive?
[17:58:17] <Tomb> Constructive:
[17:58:20] <Eluvatar> why is satire that entertains unconstructive, he'll ask, etc
[18:24:43] <Tomb> There are many other areas of TNP that he can create satires about. However, I'm not going to allow an NPAer to make a laughingstock out of the NPA. That's how it stands with me right now. Feel free to get in touch with him and communicate to him my concerns (you may quote anything that was said in our conversation).
[18:24:52] <Tomb> If he agrees to work constructively, he’s welcome aboard. I’m not asking for much anyways. If not, there’s always a next time, as they say.
[18:25:15] <Eluvatar> I see.

[16:15:25] <Eluvatar> so I spoke to flemingovia
[16:18:36] <Tomb> Yeah
[16:20:05] <Eluvatar> He does not wish to make any assurances that are not demanded of other applicants, and views this as an attack on the freedom of speech
[16:20:26] <Eluvatar> noting that our bill of rights goes above and beyond requiring protection of freedom of speach in saying that it must be _encouraged_ by the government
[16:20:43] <Eluvatar> >
[16:20:43] <Eluvatar> 2. Each Nation's rights to free speech, free press, and the free expression of religion shall not be infringed, and shall be encouraged, by the governmental authorities of the region
[16:20:48] <Eluvatar> +.
[16:21:18] <Tomb> I expected as much.
[16:21:20] <Eluvatar> Am I instructed to deny his application?
[16:21:28] <Tomb> Yes, please.
[16:43:30] <Eluvatar> done

 

[Gracius Maximus]

Thank you.

 

[Democratic Donkeys]

[17:58:07] <Eluvatar> how are we going to distinguish constructive from unconstructive?
[17:58:17] <Tomb> Constructive:

I would be interested to know what was supposed to go there? As in it would be nice if Tomb would elucidate us on his concept of constructive criticism so we can avoid such issues in the future. (hopefully )